About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4 (some duplicates have been removed)
, the senate majority leader, harry reid attacked it on tuesday. >> everyone has to look at the source where it comes from. a source that has brought up a lot of non-issues. i've told you how i feel about the source of this stuff. and it's really, very very typical for the source. >> bill: now, all fair minded americans will presume that senator menendez is innocent until proven guilty of any allegations, but in general, exploiting children is the worst possible scenario for any politician, and the evidence shows that he did not disclose about the jet trips, but that's a trifle compared to the under age always. they held it back for some time. but now, the story has advanced far beyond the rumor stage, and as an american, i hope that he had nothing to do with exploiting children, i hope. fox's news hour with laura ingram, and how do you read this. >> well, if the allegations are true, he's going to have to step down. >> bill: he'll go to prison. >> yes, we're talking about politics for a moment. and harry reid, i understand that he wants to write off anything that the daily caller is saying,
about politics for a moment. and harry reid, i understand that he wants to write off anything that the daily caller is saying, and they backed off everything said for the day, but basically, they're punching on anything said before senator menendez. when you're a public official and elected, six, seven weeks ago by the people of your state to represent them, you have to hold yourself out as someone worthy of the trust of the public. and the late payments for the jet trips not withstanding, he violated senate ethics rules by not reporting those as significant gifts, and that in and of itself is serious. >> bill: he took the trips in august of 2010, and reimbursed the government in january of 2013, after the daily caller exposed the story. >> what it reminds me of a little bit is what happened with the john edwards story. of course one publication, the national enquirer was covering it, and pretty much every stayed away from it, and poo pooed it, and a significant time later, the national inquirer was right and they had done good reporting. i don't know the background of the rep
. how d special report? how are you doing. >> reporter: good morning, bill. bill: harry reid is talking about this potentially on the floor of the senate. if there is news we'll bring it to our viewers. graham says the debate is not over, it has not been serious. what gives? >> reporter: a couple of things, one is confirmation hearings matter. this was not a good showing for chuck hagel in this confirmation hearing and despite the fact that you have other controversial cabinet nominees who have potentially bumpy confirmation hearings hagel's did not go well, and even folks on the democratic side will acknowledge that, and that has made it even more difficult. then you have the additional problem, from his supporters' point of view, that there are calls for speeches that did not come out for the committee that hagel gave and they never received, and now you have one speech, for example, that a group says that they can get to the committee by friday. its already out of committee, but -- so now it's on the house floor. this vote happens, they need 60 votes. democrats have a 55-45 vote marg
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (31 Dec 2014)